Layout with 18 inch radius curves

[kencunningham]

Will i end up wanting to bang my head against the wall if i build a layout that uses 18 inch radius curves?  Im trying to keep the size down, but i have read posts that suggest 22 is the minimum you should use.  This is a HO layout.

[Doneldon]

ken-

Lots of trains will operate on 18" radius curves but you'll find that even some which can negotiate such curves look pretty unrealistic doing so. Twenty-two inches is better but even that radius will eliminate larger steam engines and long rolling stock. Still, 22" is the largest you can fit on the customary 4'x8' plywood sheet. I'd suggest going with the 22" curves if you are building such a railroad. Often you can use much larger curves if you have a narrow aound-the-room style layout. That generally makes longer straight sections possible, too. In general, use the broadest curvature you can for best appearance and operation.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    -- D

[rogertra]

Why a 4 x 8?

It's a space eating hog and looks terrible.

In order to gain full access you need a space 8 x 12 just to allow a two foot space around the outside edges.  You'd be much better off putting the railway around the walls of that same 8 x 12 foot room and you'd end up with much better curves, 24" at least and a much more realistic railway.  The 4 x 8 idea should have been taken out behind the barn decades ago and put out of its misery.

[jward]

i am using 18"r. stay away from the 18"r standard switches (use #4 or #5 instead) and you shouldn't have problems if you run shorter cars and locomotives. anything up to about 8" in length should work fine. just be sure that you a short section of straight track between curves of opposite directions. for example, a gp40 with a 40 foot freight car on an 18"r reverse curve puts the couplers at almost the limit of the coupler's swing. a gp40 with a 50 foot car will exceed these limits and derail. adding a 6 inch straight between the two curves will keep everyting within limits.

i designed my railroad with these rulkes in mind, and it operates very well.

[Jerrys HO]

I agree with you jward. My layout is built half with 18r and half with 22r. I have had no problems except for self inflicting ones. I can say do not make an S curve with 18r as larger cars will derail unless you use a small straight as an easement. I have only one non Bachmann loco which is a MTH SD70ACE which handles my 18r quite well. I use mainly #5 switches on the main lines and #4's in my yard. #4's with a 1/2 22r make a perfect yard lining the rails side by side. I do have a couple of standard switches that I put in various places where they are not used as much.

jward I wish I would have considered adding a small straight as you suggested before I laid my track. But everything seems to work fine as is.

Jerry

[kencunningham]

Thanks to all who replied, all very good advise.  Hunt, i cant thank you enought for that link, you da man!  In reality im only wanting to do part of the layout with 18r and there will not be any backing up in this section of the track, however im about to make a trip down to the LHS and scope some cars out to see exactly what size i would like to end up running. 

I found a Athern Genesis GP 15-1 with Tsunami sound for 150 bucks, im thinking this isnt a bad deal from what i have been finding on the internet.  This is NIB by the way. 

Im thinking that the length of cars should kinda match the length of the loco to look good?  I have allso looked at SD-60 and SD-70, i cant remember but im sure that atleast one of these uses 6 axles.

Everything is still in the planning stage so now is the time to make the decisions that keep me on track so i dont waste money.  Thanks for the help and suggestions guy, keep em coming.

[jward]

any emd with an sd designation is 6 axle, any gp is 4 axle.

for general electric locomotives, most of them have a b in the model number for 4 axle, c for 6 axle. examples: u30c, b23-7, c44-9w.

for alco diesels, rs series are 4 axle, rsd are 6 axle. for the later century series, c designates the century line, the first number is the number of axles, the last 2 are the horsepower in hundreds. examples: c420, c628.

150 seems to be a pretty good price for a sound equipped locomotive.

[Doneldon]

ken-

The relative length of cars and locomotives isn't an issue.

Until the 1950s, most freight cars were shorter than most locos while passenger cars were invariably longer than both. The vast majority of freight cars were around 40' long, with some 50' house cars, the occasional extra-long flat and and a few extra-long gons. Beginning in the mid-1950s or so, railroads began building longer and bulkier freight cars to increase efficiency. This change accelerated through the next 30 years to the point that many new freight cars are as long or longer than passenger cars. They'd be consistently longer than locos, too, except that locos themselves have also grown in length. A lot. Cars got longer, higher and wider. Autoloaders can be as long as passenger cars, flatcars can look as long as a whole old time train, tankers carry many more gallons and hoppers are gigantic rolling warehouses.

So does the relative size mean you can't pull a huge modern hopper with a little diamond stack 4-4-0 steamer? No, not really, at least not because the car is longer than the loco. The problem here would be that you'd have a major anachronism; 1880s locomotives have probably never been coupled to 1990s-vintage freight stock.

The problems with length are that longer locomotives and rolling stock have trouble negotiating tight curves and that they often look foolish even when they can manage to stay on track. It's not because of some aesthetic mismatch between cars and locos.
                                                                                                                                                       -- D

[kencunningham]

Well i tried to post with a pic of the cars sitting on the 24r track that i just bought, but i got a message saying that the upload folder was full.  I dont think that post will show up so here i go again, this time without the pic.

I went to the LHS and bought some 24r track and 3 60ft NS wood chip hopper cars.  I hooked up a few pieces on the kitchen table and put two of the cars on the track,  the couplers mated pretty good when one was rolled up to the other.  While i was there i measured a GP 15 and it was 55ft if i remember correctly.  By using the formula from the post that was deleted, im in the "it will work range, but not ideal".  The maximum size i can put in that room is gonna be 10' 2" wide by 10ft depth, which would leave only enough room to open the doors to the room and the closet.   Maybe i just need to bite the bullet and buy some layout software.

[Doneldon]

ken-

PM Hunt and see if he'll send the post to you again. I'm not sure why he deletes all of his stuff. I have a hunch that he values his ideas too highly to risk leaving them in public. At any rate, he'll probably send it to you again if you ask nicely.

If you have a 10'x10' room which you can dedicate to trains I strongly suggest that you do an around the perimeter layout, possibly with a peninsula jutting into the room. You can use lift out or swinging sections to cope with the doors. You might even go with two levels which can increase your area and mainline run a lot. Doors to most rooms open into the room but you can have a duck under if the doors open out.

Track planning software is a good idea. You might also want to check online layout libraries to see if there's something you can bend to your resources and desires.

                                                                                                                                                                                     -- D

[kencunningham]

Thanks Doneldon.  I still know where that link went so it's good.  The track software seems pretty in depth.  I did find one that I have managed to figure out how use, but I really dont want to plop 60 dollars down for something I will use only once.  I did sit down with some graph paper and draw a layout, which I intended to post here for reiew.  However, everytime I try to post a pic I get the upload folder is full message.  I did resize the photos to get them under the size limit, but to no avail.

I guess I'm going to be on my own with that, or go to another forum and start posting there instead.

[Jerrys HO]

ken

You have to have a photobucket account to post pics here. Do a search on posting pics I believe it  was vidguy who posted how .
I used anyrail.com's trial version ( up to 50 pieces ) and wound up purchasing the whole thing as I have remodeled my layout 26 times. It was kinda worth it for me.

Jerry

[kencunningham]

Thats the software that ive been playing around with.  Haven't tried doing elevated rail yet.

[Jerrys HO]

Ken-
I used it for track designing the layout. The elevation I used the wisdom of the railroad  gods on this forum. For the elevation I used a cookie cutter design bracing it up with Woodland Scenics risers. You may show the track to be off a little but that's OK as the tolerances are not that critical. I did cut some pieces to special lengths as needed. The track holds together with the rail joiners and a little help of the hot glue gun holding the track to the foam board.

Jerry

[Doneldon]

ken-

Layout software can be used for more than layout planning. A relative, who lacks both space and money, used one to design, scenic and operate a pretty neat pike, all in cyberspace. Or, sell it after you've used it. Or, keep ot to plan your next layout. Or ...
                                                                                                                                                      -- D